From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 733E745D90A for ; Thu, 10 Sep 2026 11:15:16 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789038917; cv=none; b=B9FWpttck1uzY7ru7i0iI63+PmtzSMIZymbpSoBQ8bggSwgywREMjC93EyUH6LQMEZlkPKRR0vUrk5m2DcpwkMxWwuSI0Wq5Yb6CkRzO0KfEAclcSibNXkpC2AFegaJqJFohHw9k/wXx7YJ2FX0+Ncw8AHZJq2XDU8sVE7O94WA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789038917; c=relaxed/simple; bh=pUDRGTVrwT7ncSTxJwxSrcOD0ERx+5fwpUJgSXaDeVs=; h=From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Date: Message-Id; b=MUB4IAoDPdmhiq2xX8j9tMrv6vomeUXkPLy1FMVbnJEp+XBDjlchV73IJUtZB0EHtAax2JrI+5sGRT+cxirR4rtqazM9/GyugMCTU+Z6XcHR2ej/J+iehTu0L4PA/ctR9Px7Glau8onWQMDGCIFYf0hjEoYepYOh84324P0+nPs= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=IqMErAuO; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="IqMErAuO" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0C1EA1F000FF; Thu, 10 Sep 2026 11:15:15 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1789038916; bh=pUDRGTVrwT7ncSTxJwxSrcOD0ERx+5fwpUJgSXaDeVs=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=IqMErAuO7ufi6QX9QOZlZltS2OIURwHuHiX6OTAK2dsaQY4EYyT9LcmH1tlggVT2Y TK1i4KudzYgrKT60wO83cVZAqVC1O9VRwggJ9p3wr0xaNkutIxa0kwYEaXmI30YWq2 9BzFGKVrqFM9kBmLK3i/SV4as7Zzca6o8WAADrLFtldhq0jf/z6phJpEs6M9/vraQa WZwBN3dijKM954VM9wWJgAMBQryNy199DeuCTepZfygZ1UUmDjD+Sd07sN8KRC5NeZ lIxU0a+Hxa5ejTCVjil7MSnT6TNMmKIHW7DK07BO9TySkXcLjpYIL/SGMJ5MM/msZS 1TJUGuCUNiD0A== From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 10/13] s390/qdio_setup: Use kzalloc() for QDIO buffers Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: =?utf-8?b?TWlrZSBSYXBvcG9ydCAoTWljcm9zb2Z0KQ==?= Cc: "Heiko Carstens" , "Alexander Gordeev" , "Christian Borntraeger" , "Vasily Gorbik" , linux-s390@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20260910-s390-cio-ready-v2-10-e931086fdde1@kernel.org> References: <20260910-s390-cio-ready-v2-0-e931086fdde1@kernel.org> <20260910-s390-cio-ready-v2-10-e931086fdde1@kernel.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2026 11:15:15 +0000 Message-Id: <20260910111516.0C1EA1F000FF@smtp.kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: > qdio_alloc_buffers() allocates the QDIO buffers. >=20 > This memory can be allocated with kmalloc() as there's nothing special > about it to go directly to the page allocator. >=20 > kmalloc() provides a better API that does not require ugly casts and > kfree() does not need to know the size of the freed object. >=20 > Performance difference between kmalloc() and __get_free_pages() is not > measurable as both allocators take an object/page from a per-CPU list for > fast path allocations. >=20 > For the slow path the performance is anyway determined by the amount of > reclaim involved rather than by what allocator is used. >=20 > Replace use of get_zeroed_page() with kzalloc() and free_page() with > kfree(). >=20 > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/635405e4-9423-4a25-a6e7-e03c8ea0bcbe@re= dhat.com > Assisted-by: copilot:claude-opus > Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport (Microsoft) Sashiko has reviewed this patch and found no issues. It looks great! --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260910-s390-cio-r= eady-v2-0-e931086fdde1@kernel.org?part=3D10